It looks to use CoreImage for it's image processing, which would be cool, as that would mean it uses the GPU for image processing. The demo shows some very responsive image processing. My goddammed photoshop CS1 RAW import may take a day just to generate thumbnails from RAW files. I am so upgrading.
A lot of his points about new television shows being marketed outside of television are already proven with the DVD market - which isn't much different from the download market when compared to commercial broadcast television. TV Shows could be directly targetted at this market (or download market) and bypass network TV entirely. The Family Guy and other DVD box sets shows how marginalized the broadcast TV market has become.
So this guy needs to be removed from his job immediately. Clearly he's disappointed that he now has to rescue black people with his statement of "the victims bear responsibility". WTF?!?
Why didn't Bush fire his sorry ass for stating that all these destitute black people, with absolutely no money or places to go, were at fault for not evacuting?
Does he think all these people, on food stamps and welfare, would suddenly magically find the $20 it takes to even buy the Gasoline needed to drive out of the city? And that's assuming they even HAD a car or a place to go!
Does he assume everybody is rich and has a big cozy SUV? And that everybody in America has a magical pile of $20 bills tucked away somewhere in their suburban picket-fenced single-family home lined with Crape Myrtle trees and big black SUVs with "W" stickers ready to evacuate people?
Clearly this suburban redneck had no clue what the real world was like in New Orleans. "Oh why don't you guys all pack up in your minivans and rent a hotel room for at the Marriott for the night, and we'll all get together after this whole thing is over." Yah right, moron.. Instead, he sees large groups of black people, and immediately thinks 'guns'. Shiny sci-fi guns, no less!
BTW, if this disaster is the victim's responsibility, then what exactly is YOUR job? How does 'government helping people' fit in with your capitalist's view of 'poor people deserve what they get'?
Why is watching porn at the library an illegal activity in the first place?
Why choose "porn" to be illegal? How is porn somehow illegal, and not some other completely aribitrary thing, like "gardening", illegal? Why aren't we banning books about "Auto Repair" at the library?
Is this some Christian thing to arbitrarily choose pornography to be illegal? To non-christians, why would porn matter?
Why not just make it legal, and let people check out porn at the library, like they would a book on 18th century French literature?
The CPU speed on the Mac mini might not be fast enough, although my DVR playbacks are usually in HD, which overtaxes my PowerBook (1.3GHz), but not my dual PowerMac (2x2.5GHz).
The other thing is that the Mac mini doesn't have a gigabit ethernet, which makes things a little more difficult for HD networked boxes...
Recording from Motorola 6208 through firewire works great on MacOSX as well. I would say its the easiest way to record high-def so far, and you get the ability to record premium channels - Matrix trilogy was on in High Def this past weekend on Cinemax. You can use iCal to automatically schedule recordings, and set the firewire interface to capture.
Now, if only I had a MPEG transport stream player that doesn't disrupt audio that VLC player does on my PowerMac..
You do realize that the movie Starship Troopers is satire.. It actually makes fun of the Heinlein book that it is based on, quite brilliantly.
Anyways, one doesn't need to live under a powerful government - that's a very big-government republican philosophy. The proper philosophy is to live WITH a government, rather than UNDER it.
This is also where I believe criminals should be given the right to vote. Isn't their choice of not following laws a perfectly valid philosophy that should be taken into consideration when defining government? For example, if you were a felon because you wanted to free slaves, should you have your voting rights taken away because you actively worked against the principles of government? Shouldn't anti-government viewpioints be perfectly acceptable?
The even bigger problem is the arrogance of some people who seem to think that if someone voted for Bush he was deceived, conned, stupid, irrational, non-educated, a sheep, or a Bible-thumper when in fact many people simply do not agree with liberals and Democrats. It's this disconnect with reality and mainstream America that cost the liberals the election.
As long as you--and people like you--continue to engage in this arrogance and deny the reality that your political preferences are in the minority you will continue to lose elections.
I think the best way for liberals to not think of you conservatives as deceived conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers, is for you conservatives to actually stop being decieved conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers.
Or are you saying it's OK for you conservatives to be deceived conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers? Should liberals be like you deceived conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers to prevent further liberal arrogance?
Criticism is a perfectly valid thing. You conservatives need to recognize your faults, but, unfortunately, I suspect you don't think you have faults. There was a study published in a psychology journal a few years back that came to the obvious conclusion: Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and smart people know their faults. Do you think this applies to conservatives? If so, tell me, what are your faults? What are the faults of conservatism? What do you believe is wrong with the Republican party?
I would love it if the population could be liberalized first. Could the democrats start a campaign equating religion with atrocities? Christianity=bad? That it's OK to enjoy life every now and then? That the thing called "God" that you worship, not everyone believes in or cares about? That it actually doesn't affect you if gay people have sex? That abortion is a good way to have as much sex as you want without having to have a kid? That sex with reckless abandon is a happy thing? That drugs are fun for the whole family? That prostitution is a good way for ugly people to finally sex? That gambling is a fun and entertaining activity thats good for the economy? That porn is fun? That cursing is a good way to let your frustrations out? That breeding kids isn't the ultimate goal in life? That conservatives make horrible music? That there are better things to do in life than to worship God? That listening to a blue-polyester clad preacher for hours is actually creepy? The list of conservative-bashing could go on and on, and would be quite entertaining.
It would be great to fix the population first before having democrats attempt to gain any control. What good is a government if the population itself is horrible?
Actually, the taliban are probably believe in more civil rights than the extreme right wing god/gun nut that voted for this time around. Remember, it was only 150 years ago that those same people were trading slaves. If you ever bothered going to the south, even places like Texas, you'd know that, if these nuts were given the choice, they would go back to enslaving black people. Heck, wasn't it only a few years ago that a black guy got lynched by having his body dragged along a rural dirt road for miles until his body disintegrated? Southerners completely fear black people. You would find very few of them in a republican convention, even though they comprise a large portion of the south, like 30%.
So, yes, what we are truly saying is, YOUR COUNTRYMEN are worse than the Taliban. They worship a god that rational northerners have genarally rejected, while at the same time remain a parasitic scourge to rich industrialized northern states.
We're better off without them. Cut them off. Let them fend for themselves. The north would do just fine without the American Taliban.
Or do what europe does and limit the federal government to basic civil and monetary polices, and let the states handle defense, taxes, and social policies.
The voting SHOULD be skewed towards urban interests, because that's where most of the people are.
Do you believe it is appropriate for rural interests to overtake urban interests? Only 1% of the population are now farmers, yet they somehow manage to overweigh their influence on the US government due to our founding fathers lack of vision - they probably just assumed that the US was going to be a rural country forever. This is why we have a government that largely appears to be run by inbred redneck trailer trash that are proud of their lack of edumacation, because, the horrible rural population seems to get 5 votes for every one urban vote.
The electoral college AND the senate have got to go, they're entireley inappropriate for this modern industrialized era.
Besides, the proof of the failures of the electoral college system was clearly shown by the lack of any presidential campaigning in any non-battleground states.
I agree. Actually, I would go further, and state that the general public should no be allowed to vote. Democracy is a flawed system. Remember, the public is going to vote on on the tax code, judicial ethics, the military, the environment, and so on, based on who has the prettiest hair, or who has better screen presence. We have to be able to take out all other factors out of the political equation and just only allow for ability.
We really need a more focused issue based system. Instead of choosing one candidate to represent ALL of your issues, we need to be able to bring forth more focused leaders- guys that are tax experts, foreign affiars experts, judicial experts, and so on, independently of each other.
Also, we really don't need 180 million people voting, when, statistically, you only need a sample of about 35 people to represent a population anyways.
I think something like a jury system for government, where random pre-qualified jurors are chosen on an issue-by-issue basis would work best. Parties present for-against sides of each issue to each independent jury comprising about 35 people, and we have a fairer system. If the jury pool can be skewed to a higher skill level, for example, if jurors had to have doctorate degrees or certifications in the fields they are about to be presented with, then that would make it even better- it would be as if the entire population were experts in the field.
Democracy is a joke. Always has been. Always will be. We give people too much credit for just being alive.
I put Total Recall right up there with Bladerunner. It's the perfect complement. It's 180 degrees different stylistically, but still, a very coherent existential "what is reality" type of movie to complement Bladerunners "meaning of life" theme..
Yes, they sell shares, and, in if you were the owner of a business, they would sell YOUR shares. If I were making $100 million a year profit on my business, and an IPO diluted my ownership of my company by 75%, then I would end up making %25 million a year cash from my business, and who knows what the the value of the shares of my company would be worth. It could be worth nothing, it could be worth a billion.
Should the owners take such a risk on their already massively profitable business?
The thing is, as a business owner, why would I want to dilute my investment in a business by going IPO? Wouldn't I want all the profits for myself? And, did everyone forget that the purpose of owning a business is to make money by profit, rather than making money through share trading?
IPOs are pointless if you're already a massively profitable business and if you don't need anymore investment in your business. You *MIGHT* gain some return by going public, but that's not going to be likely in todays market...
A plasma or an LCD-TV with a tuner & speaker helps a lot. I had a choice between the Panasonic consumer vs. industrial plasma, and I chose the more-expensive consumer model because it came with a tuner and speakers. I had a full-surround system connected to a Pioneer 503CMX industrial-edition plasma monitor without a tuner. I replaced the entire system with a single Panasonic 50PX25UP plasma TV that comes with an integrated CableCard based tuner. The reason was because I wanted to get rid of as much extraneous electronics gear from my room- I really didn't want my living room to look like an speaker factory warehouse explosion.
Also, having stacks of surround-sound gear can become pointless if your room-acoustics is crap in the first place.
You know, I see this argument a lot, but to be honest with you, people don't care about nephews/nieces the way they do their own sons/daughters.
The editing choice he made here was correct- we needed to see senators wanting to risk their OWN kids lives, not someone else's kids... So, why DIDN'T we see any congressman want to risk their own kids lives for war?
Slashdot Mirror
It looks to use CoreImage for it's image processing, which would be cool, as that would mean it uses the GPU for image processing. The demo shows some very responsive image processing. My goddammed photoshop CS1 RAW import may take a day just to generate thumbnails from RAW files. I am so upgrading.
A lot of his points about new television shows being marketed outside of television are already proven with the DVD market - which isn't much different from the download market when compared to commercial broadcast television. TV Shows could be directly targetted at this market (or download market) and bypass network TV entirely. The Family Guy and other DVD box sets shows how marginalized the broadcast TV market has become.
So this guy needs to be removed from his job immediately. Clearly he's disappointed that he now has to rescue black people with his statement of "the victims bear responsibility". WTF?!?
Why didn't Bush fire his sorry ass for stating that all these destitute black people, with absolutely no money or places to go, were at fault for not evacuting?
Does he think all these people, on food stamps and welfare, would suddenly magically find the $20 it takes to even buy the Gasoline needed to drive out of the city? And that's assuming they even HAD a car or a place to go!
Does he assume everybody is rich and has a big cozy SUV? And that everybody in America has a magical pile of $20 bills tucked away somewhere in their suburban picket-fenced single-family home lined with Crape Myrtle trees and big black SUVs with "W" stickers ready to evacuate people?
Clearly this suburban redneck had no clue what the real world was like in New Orleans. "Oh why don't you guys all pack up in your minivans and rent a hotel room for at the Marriott for the night, and we'll all get together after this whole thing is over." Yah right, moron.. Instead, he sees large groups of black people, and immediately thinks 'guns'. Shiny sci-fi guns, no less!
BTW, if this disaster is the victim's responsibility, then what exactly is YOUR job? How does 'government helping people' fit in with your capitalist's view of 'poor people deserve what they get'?
Why is watching porn at the library an illegal activity in the first place?
Why choose "porn" to be illegal? How is porn somehow illegal, and not some other completely aribitrary thing, like "gardening", illegal? Why aren't we banning books about "Auto Repair" at the library?
Is this some Christian thing to arbitrarily choose pornography to be illegal? To non-christians, why would porn matter?
Why not just make it legal, and let people check out porn at the library, like they would a book on 18th century French literature?
The CPU speed on the Mac mini might not be fast enough, although my DVR playbacks are usually in HD, which overtaxes my PowerBook (1.3GHz), but not my dual PowerMac (2x2.5GHz).
The other thing is that the Mac mini doesn't have a gigabit ethernet, which makes things a little more difficult for HD networked boxes...
Actually there's already a Metroid movie.. it's called Alien.
Recording from Motorola 6208 through firewire works great on MacOSX as well. I would say its the easiest way to record high-def so far, and you get the ability to record premium channels - Matrix trilogy was on in High Def this past weekend on Cinemax. You can use iCal to automatically schedule recordings, and set the firewire interface to capture.
Now, if only I had a MPEG transport stream player that doesn't disrupt audio that VLC player does on my PowerMac..
You do realize that the movie Starship Troopers is satire.. It actually makes fun of the Heinlein book that it is based on, quite brilliantly.
Anyways, one doesn't need to live under a powerful government - that's a very big-government republican philosophy. The proper philosophy is to live WITH a government, rather than UNDER it.
This is also where I believe criminals should be given the right to vote. Isn't their choice of not following laws a perfectly valid philosophy that should be taken into consideration when defining government? For example, if you were a felon because you wanted to free slaves, should you have your voting rights taken away because you actively worked against the principles of government? Shouldn't anti-government viewpioints be perfectly acceptable?
The even bigger problem is the arrogance of some people who seem to think that if someone voted for Bush he was deceived, conned, stupid, irrational, non-educated, a sheep, or a Bible-thumper when in fact many people simply do not agree with liberals and Democrats. It's this disconnect with reality and mainstream America that cost the liberals the election.
As long as you--and people like you--continue to engage in this arrogance and deny the reality that your political preferences are in the minority you will continue to lose elections.
I think the best way for liberals to not think of you conservatives as deceived conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers, is for you conservatives to actually stop being decieved conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers.
Or are you saying it's OK for you conservatives to be deceived conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers? Should liberals be like you deceived conned stupid irrational non-educated sheepish bible thumpers to prevent further liberal arrogance?
Criticism is a perfectly valid thing. You conservatives need to recognize your faults, but, unfortunately, I suspect you don't think you have faults. There was a study published in a psychology journal a few years back that came to the obvious conclusion: Stupid people don't know they're stupid, and smart people know their faults. Do you think this applies to conservatives? If so, tell me, what are your faults? What are the faults of conservatism? What do you believe is wrong with the Republican party?
Now tell me who's the arrogant ones here...
I would love it if the population could be liberalized first. Could the democrats start a campaign equating religion with atrocities? Christianity=bad? That it's OK to enjoy life every now and then? That the thing called "God" that you worship, not everyone believes in or cares about? That it actually doesn't affect you if gay people have sex? That abortion is a good way to have as much sex as you want without having to have a kid? That sex with reckless abandon is a happy thing? That drugs are fun for the whole family? That prostitution is a good way for ugly people to finally sex? That gambling is a fun and entertaining activity thats good for the economy? That porn is fun? That cursing is a good way to let your frustrations out? That breeding kids isn't the ultimate goal in life? That conservatives make horrible music? That there are better things to do in life than to worship God? That listening to a blue-polyester clad preacher for hours is actually creepy? The list of conservative-bashing could go on and on, and would be quite entertaining.
It would be great to fix the population first before having democrats attempt to gain any control. What good is a government if the population itself is horrible?
I certainly don't want to be associated with any red state at this point...
Actually, the taliban are probably believe in more civil rights than the extreme right wing god/gun nut that voted for this time around. Remember, it was only 150 years ago that those same people were trading slaves. If you ever bothered going to the south, even places like Texas, you'd know that, if these nuts were given the choice, they would go back to enslaving black people. Heck, wasn't it only a few years ago that a black guy got lynched by having his body dragged along a rural dirt road for miles until his body disintegrated? Southerners completely fear black people. You would find very few of them in a republican convention, even though they comprise a large portion of the south, like 30%.
So, yes, what we are truly saying is, YOUR COUNTRYMEN are worse than the Taliban. They worship a god that rational northerners have genarally rejected, while at the same time remain a parasitic scourge to rich industrialized northern states.
We're better off without them. Cut them off. Let them fend for themselves. The north would do just fine without the American Taliban.
Actually, USSR's diversion into afghanistan is what broke their economy.
Or do what europe does and limit the federal government to basic civil and monetary polices, and let the states handle defense, taxes, and social policies.
The voting SHOULD be skewed towards urban interests, because that's where most of the people are.
Do you believe it is appropriate for rural interests to overtake urban interests? Only 1% of the population are now farmers, yet they somehow manage to overweigh their influence on the US government due to our founding fathers lack of vision - they probably just assumed that the US was going to be a rural country forever. This is why we have a government that largely appears to be run by inbred redneck trailer trash that are proud of their lack of edumacation, because, the horrible rural population seems to get 5 votes for every one urban vote.
The electoral college AND the senate have got to go, they're entireley inappropriate for this modern industrialized era.
Besides, the proof of the failures of the electoral college system was clearly shown by the lack of any presidential campaigning in any non-battleground states.
I agree. Actually, I would go further, and state that the general public should no be allowed to vote. Democracy is a flawed system. Remember, the public is going to vote on on the tax code, judicial ethics, the military, the environment, and so on, based on who has the prettiest hair, or who has better screen presence. We have to be able to take out all other factors out of the political equation and just only allow for ability.
We really need a more focused issue based system. Instead of choosing one candidate to represent ALL of your issues, we need to be able to bring forth more focused leaders- guys that are tax experts, foreign affiars experts, judicial experts, and so on, independently of each other.
Also, we really don't need 180 million people voting, when, statistically, you only need a sample of about 35 people to represent a population anyways.
I think something like a jury system for government, where random pre-qualified jurors are chosen on an issue-by-issue basis would work best. Parties present for-against sides of each issue to each independent jury comprising about 35 people, and we have a fairer system. If the jury pool can be skewed to a higher skill level, for example, if jurors had to have doctorate degrees or certifications in the fields they are about to be presented with, then that would make it even better- it would be as if the entire population were experts in the field.
Democracy is a joke. Always has been. Always will be. We give people too much credit for just being alive.
This is gonna be fun. I think I may be better off with a Treo 650 and a new SanDisk 2GB SD flash card installed...
So does that mean I am legally entitled to own an H-Bomb?
My siemens S56 also passed the test.. came out cleaner, too :)
I put Total Recall right up there with Bladerunner. It's the perfect complement. It's 180 degrees different stylistically, but still, a very coherent existential "what is reality" type of movie to complement Bladerunners "meaning of life" theme..
It COULD be a better deal, it might not. In this market.
If you're already massively profitable, do you need to take that risk?
Yes, they sell shares, and, in if you were the owner of a business, they would sell YOUR shares.
If I were making $100 million a year profit on my business, and an IPO diluted my ownership of my company by 75%, then I would end up making %25 million a year cash from my business, and who knows what the the value of the shares of my company would be worth. It could be worth nothing, it could be worth a billion.
Should the owners take such a risk on their already massively profitable business?
The thing is, as a business owner, why would I want to dilute my investment in a business by going IPO? Wouldn't I want all the profits for myself? And, did everyone forget that the purpose of owning a business is to make money by profit, rather than making money through share trading?
IPOs are pointless if you're already a massively profitable business and if you don't need anymore investment in your business. You *MIGHT* gain some return by going public, but that's not going to be likely in todays market...
A plasma or an LCD-TV with a tuner & speaker helps a lot. I had a choice between the Panasonic consumer vs. industrial plasma, and I chose the more-expensive consumer model because it came with a tuner and speakers. I had a full-surround system connected to a Pioneer 503CMX industrial-edition plasma monitor without a tuner. I replaced the entire system with a single Panasonic 50PX25UP plasma TV that comes with an integrated CableCard based tuner. The reason was because I wanted to get rid of as much extraneous electronics gear from my room- I really didn't want my living room to look like an speaker factory warehouse explosion.
Also, having stacks of surround-sound gear can become pointless if your room-acoustics is crap in the first place.
You know, I see this argument a lot, but to be honest with you, people don't care about nephews/nieces the way they do their own sons/daughters.
The editing choice he made here was correct- we needed to see senators wanting to risk their OWN kids lives, not someone else's kids... So, why DIDN'T we see any congressman want to risk their own kids lives for war?